I am taking a pause to examine my thoughts on the Davis - Bowater issue thus far.
Anti-Bowater camp: If I have read the arguments correctly so far, the contention is that Baldwin may have ignored or combined one or more John Bowater. In his 2000 TAG article, the author clearly outline the families of John Bowater Sr. and Jr. So ignoring or combining Johns doesn't seem to be the case.
The argument against the Mary Wright condemning her marriage being the wife of James Wright is, I believe, a valid one. A Quaker condemning her marriage to another Quaker as being contrary to discipline just doesn't ring true.
The John Beals and Sarah Davis wills do not, in my opinion, prove Mary Davis to be the wife of James Wright.
Pro-Bowater: Baldwin's research appears to be well done and solid. The above mentioned marriage issue aside, his arguments in the 1997 Quaker marriage certificates TAG article are reasonable.
Right now, the pro-Davis arguments are the weakest. Bowater and "maiden name unknown" are the strongest.
A wide gap between the ages of children from a parent's 1st and 2nd marriage is not uncommon. Likewise, women having their children during their late 30s did happen, put was not a regular occurrence. The children from John Bowater Sr.'s 1st marriage were born during the 1630s; those from his 2nd, 50 years later. Mary Maunder, born about 1649, had her children in 1687 and 1689, at about ages 37 and 39. All a bit unusual.